Armored Car Without Penis. Let’s Save the Whales.

Russians who were looking forward to whale penis leather seats for their $1.45 million bulletproof SUVs are crying in disappointment, and pointing their fingers at environmentalists and Pamela Anderson for this grave injustice.

While the Prombron Monaco Red Diamond Edition SUV comes with gold trim, gauges encrusted with diamonds and rubies and three bottles of premium vodka, Russian millionaires will have to do without ultra soft and luxurious penis skin.

Here’s a snippet of the absolutely brilliant press release put out by Leonard F. Yankelovich of Dartz, the Prombron manufacturer.

ARMORED CAR WITHOUT PENIS. LET’S SAVE THE WHALES.

One month ago DARTZ presented uberluxury armored car with whale penis interior – PROMBRON’ (ex.RussoBaltique), lot of people name this car as DARTZ.KOMBAT. As the world’s resonance was very huge and DARTZ got lot of angry e-mails from Greenpeace, WWF and also Pamela Anderson, DARTZ make strong decision to stop their plans regarding such interior.

We have no any ideas to kill the whale or something like that. All we want – to make just luxury car. Real luxury car which will be world number one car. We just looking for most expensive products for this car – and that’s why we choosed whale penis leathure when we checked it is most of most. After wave of protest we realised our mistake and make a decision not to use natural leathure at all.

We will focus on world most advanced nanotechnologies to achieve interior highest quality using artificial materials which also was never used for cars. We want to tell our hello to all whales: “Our Sea Brothers! We all know that earth are stand on three whales – we will keep You live! We don’t Earth fall down to Ocean!”

Yes, we all know that earth are stand on three whales. Therefore, the world thanks you, Dartz, for making such a selfless sacrifice.

Link [JamesList] via [Wired]

Photo credit: JamesList

Hummer Owners Claim Moral High Ground

Most people who buy Hummers do so out of vanity or to make up for certain physical deficiencies. But, Hummer owners themselves actually believe that they’ve got the moral high ground because they’re – get this – defending America’s frontier lifestyle against anti-American critics.

A new study in the Journal of Consumer Research came to this conclusion after the authors researched attitudes toward owning and driving Hummers. They found that Hummer drivers see themselves as patriotic defenders of the American spirit, framing themselves as “moral protagonists” even as they unapologetically contribute to harming the very country they claim to love so much.

From Eurekalert:

“As we studied American Hummer owners and their ideological beliefs, we found that they consider Hummer driving a highly moral consumption choice,” write the authors. “For Hummer owners it is possible to claim the moral high ground.”

The authors explain that Hummer owners employ the ideology of American foundational myths, such as the “rugged individual,” and the “boundless frontier” to construct themselves as moral protagonists. They often believe they represent a bastion again anti-American discourses evoked by their critics.

“Our analysis of the underlying American identity discourses revealed that being under siege by (moral) critics is an historically established feature of being an American,” write the authors. “The moralistic critique of their consumption choices readily inspired Hummer owners to adopt the role of the moral protagonist who defends American national ideals.”

Amazing, isn’t it? Of course, Hummer owners aren’t the only ones that take this stance – conservatives in general employ similar excuses for their desperate attempts to preserve what they see as “the American lifestyle”. To them, being American is apparently synonymous with being selfish assholes who don’t give a shit about the next generation, only about their own desires.

Fuck you and your H2!

Link [Eurekalert]
Photo credit: FUH2

Stackable Electric Paris City Cars Save Energy and Space

Small electric cars could transform the world’s big cities from pollution factories to clean, green, efficient metropolises. But one electric vehicle idea takes that concept even further, making a fleet of rental EVs stackable to eliminate the need for vast parking lots, increasing the availability of green space for urban residents.

Designer Taylor Manuilow created the City Car with Paris in mind, imagining an all-electric vehicle that would be available to rent in at all metro stations and other areas around the city.

From Ecofriend:

The cars will be stacked along with a kiosk, which will be used by the commuter to enter the details of his or her commute. New users will have to sign up for using the service initially after which all their commutes will be charged on their credit cards.

Once the details are entered in the kiosk, the system will allow the user to drive one car. On entering the car the user will have the option to change the colors of the interiors or the position of the seats according to his or her requirements. At the end of the commute the user will have to leave the car at the closest kiosk, where the car’s onboard batteries will automatically be recharged, gearing it up for the next user.

For most urban residents and visitors, this sort of transportation – in addition to walking, bicycling and public transportation – is all that is needed to get around. Imagine how much more pleasant cities would be if personal vehicles were limited and almost everyone used a system like this.  It would be like breathing in crisp, clean country air in comparison to the gritty, polluted air that we deal with now.

Link [Ecofriend]

GM Turns its Back on Safe Mercury Disposal

Emerging from bankruptcy, the new GM has made many a promise about becoming greener and more sustainable – but don’t ask them to do anything about the environmental impact of their ‘old’ cars. The company has announced that it will no longer participate in a partnership that collects toxic mercury switches from vehicles before they’re recycled.

With the popularity of the ‘Cash for Clunkers’ program, this decision means that thousands of GM mercury switches could end up polluting the environment.

From The Huffington Post:

GM said its new company is not a member of the partnership because it no longer makes vehicles with mercury switches and is not responsible for the older vehicles. The old company, which is still under bankruptcy court supervision, said it is reviewing agreements involving the former company and declined to comment.

Roughly 36 million mercury switches were used in trunk convenience lights and antilock brakes in vehicles built in the 1980s and 1990s. More than half of them are in GM vehicles built before 2000.

The auto industry partnership, called the End of Life Vehicle Solutions Corp., or ELVS, was created in 2005 to prevent mercury emissions from being released into the environment when vehicles are crushed and shredded. It works closely with the National Vehicle Mercury Switch Recovery Program, which the Environmental Protection Agency helped form with automakers, the steel industry and environmentalists in 2006.

Unfortunately, the loss of GM’s annual dues is having a huge impact on ELVS’ budget. Without those funds, the program may be forced to scale back operations or even stop what they’re doing entirely.

If GM is really serious about being green, they’ve got to take responsibility for things like this.

Link [Huffington Post]
Photo credit: Flickr user dave_7

Car Tires Made from Orange Peel Oil

The problem with tires isn’t just that they’re a huge waste material, collecting by the thousands in huge piles all over the world. It’s also that they’re made from petroleum. A new tire by Yokohama solves at least half of that problem, producing a car tire made with orange oil as the primary ingredient to make vulcanized rubber.

From Earth 911:

The new tire is called the Super E-spec™ and has already received the Popular Mechanics Editor’s Choice Award in 2008. Yokohama will initially market the tire for hybrid car models such as the Toyota Prius.

“The eco-focused dB Super E-spec mixes sustainable orange oil and natural rubber to drastically cut the use of petroleum, without compromising performance,” Yokohama vice president of sales Dan King said. “It also helps consumers save money at the gas pump by improving fuel efficiency via a 20-percent reduction in rolling resistance.”

Orange oil is considered sustainable because it is produced from a renewable resource. The same philosophy of reducing petroleum use is utilized in producing plastics from corn starch or vegetable oil.

Check out the video:

Yokohama hasn’t stated whether orange oil will biodegrade over time, or if it would burn in quite the same way as petroleum, which can smolder for months and be difficult to extinguish.

We’ve been told for so long that we need petroleum, that there are so many things we can’t make or do without it. Isn’t it nice to find that that isn’t true at all?

Link [Earth911]

New CAFE Standards Mean Nothing without Consumer Dedication to Efficiency

The Obama administration’s new groundbreaking CAFE and emissions standards for cars and light trucks don’t mean much if the American public can’t be goaded into choosing energy-efficient models instead of gas guzzlers.

The new rule raises the average fuel economy for cars and light trucks combined to 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016, and gives the EPA authority to regulate tailpipe emissions from vehicles. But, automakers still have loopholes to create low MPG vehicles – vehicles that American consumers still want.

The only way to get consumers to purchase the more efficient vehicles in the numbers required to make a real difference would be raising the price of gas by 100%-200%, according to Pike Research, a market research and consulting firm that provides in-depth analysis of global clean technology markets.

From Matter Network:

The ongoing problem with CAFE is that it ignores consumer demand and offers automakers too many loopholes for building lower mileage vehicles. The fact is that consumers who are paying $2 or $3 per gallon for gasoline have very little incentive to buy higher mileage vehicles, and automakers still have an incentive (consumer demand) to build low mileage, high powered, trucks and SUVs.

…Without the shift in consumer thinking, though, the CAFE rules will only be window dressing for their intended purpose – getting more fuel efficient vehicles on the road. Additionally, as automakers try to force consumers into vehicles that are not actually spurred by their demand, consumers will react with their feet, marching quickly to companies that offer vehicles they want.

After all, there is a reason that in 2008 the Volkswagen Golf was the best selling vehicle in Europe, while in the same year the Ford F-150 was the best selling vehicle in the US, and it’s got nothing to do with CAFE rules. Getting Americans to buy more efficient vehicles that use less fuel through top-down product pushes brought on by CAFE rules is failing and likely always will.

It’s true: as long as gas prices are low, Americans will stubbornly hold on to their trucks and SUVs. Last summer, people were ditching SUVs so fast that used car lots were packed full of them. Now that prices have gone back down, that momentum has come to a screeching halt.

Of course, if gas prices were simply raised as an answer to inciting consumer demand for efficient vehicles, who would benefit the most? Oil companies. That would hardly be a good thing for the environment. A high gas tax would be a more effective, albeit more complicated answer.

Link [Matter Network]
Photo credit: Freaky Humor

Former Ford SUV Factory will Now Produce Compact Electric Cars

Who would have thought that among the Big 3 Detroit automakers, Ford would emerge as the strongest -–and most sustainable? Of course, that’s not saying much. American automakers are way behind in terms of clean, green vehicles. But at last, Ford seems to be realizing that it’s the 21st century, and has invested $550 million to turn an SUV factory into a small car plant that will produce an all-electric version of the Focus.

From Green Inc.:

The Michigan Assembly Plant, known as one of the world’s most profitable manufacturing sites during the S.U.V. boom of the 1990s, was once the hub for the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator. The plant is expected to begin building the new Ford Focus next year, followed by production of the all-electric Focus in 2011.

The electric Focus will be Ford’s first all-electric passenger car for the mass market. In addition to the electric Focus, the company plans to sell an electric version of its Transit Connect commercial vehicle in 2010.

“The transformation of the Michigan Assembly Plant embodies the larger transformation under way at Ford,” said Ford’s president and chief executive, Alan Mulally, in a statement. “This is about investing in modern, efficient and flexible American manufacturing. It is about fuel economy and the electrification of vehicles.”

While one electric vehicle factory does not a green car company make, this is a step in the right direction for Ford, which has in recent decades built its brand around gigantic, gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs. Hopefully, it’s the first of many – that is, if Ford has learned anything at all from this whole automaker bailout debacle.

Link [Green Inc.]
Photo credit: Mike Cassese/Reuters

Massachusetts Considers a ‘Hummer Tax’

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick announced this week that he’s looking into creating a ‘Hummer tax’ – higher registration fees for gas-guzzling vehicles and discounts for those that do less harm to the environment. The proposal is part of the governor’s transportation plan, which will be unveiled in full today.

From Boston.com:

Environmentalists applauded the registration proposal, saying it would encourage people to buy smaller and more fuel-efficient cars, which are increasingly seen as key to curbing global warming. Similar proposals have been proposed in Massachusetts since at least 2001, but without the prominent backing of a sitting governor.

“The social costs of larger vehicles include not only the additional pollution, but also higher crash risks to other vehicles,” said Representative William Brownsberger, a Belmont Democrat who is cosponsoring two bills in the Legislature that would penalize expensive and heavy cars with higher taxes or fees.

“Big gas guzzlers will pay more for their registration,” he added. “Plug-in hybrids would pay less and you’d have a range, that kind of thing.”

It’s about time, isn’t it? If you’re such an asshole that you think you’re totally entitled to drive a Hummer around your suburban neighborhood without being held responsible for the extra pollution you’re producing and the amount of fossil fuels you’re consuming, you deserve the extra fees. And, a Hummer tax might just prevent people from buying cars like these in the first place.

Link [Boston.com]

Photo credit: Flickr user blmurch

So Much for Less Traffic Pollution in Beijing

Last summer, Beijing surprised us all when the city actually managed to reign in air pollution by removing thousands of cars from the streets (and temporarily shuttering certain nearby factories) during the Olympics. The program was so successful, the Chinese government decided to keep it going, actually paying drivers to give up their cars. Unfortunately, something went wrong somewhere along the way. You see, Beijing is somehow adding 1,466 cars to the roads every single day.

From Reuters:

“The city is facing serious traffic pressure and safety risks due to the growing number of automobiles,” Song Jianguo, head of the Beijing Traffic Management Bureau, was quoted by Xinhua news agency as saying.

Beijing registered 65,970 new vehicles in the first 45 days of the year, or a daily increase of 1,466, Xinhua said.

China has introduced incentives to try to boost domestic demand but official data shows car sales in January fell 7.76 percent from a year earlier as traditionally roaring economic growth slowed.

Beijing has also introduced rules aimed at taking a fifth of private cars off the road each day, according to license plate numbers, to ease congestion and pollution.

I wonder if the exodus of Chinese villagers from rural areas affected by drought, desertification, pollution and economic depression has anything to do with this? Likely the growing middle class has a hand in it, at least. It just seems insane to have such a large increase of vehicles on the roads despite efforts to curb traffic within city limits. This definitely won’t help them get their notoriously dirty air under control.

Link [Reuters]
Photo credit: Flickr user poeloq

Obama Will Likely Allow States to Toughen Air Quality Rules

California and other states will most likely be given permission to toughen air quality rules soon after Obama takes office, forcing automakers to produce cars that are far more efficient than those allowed under current federal standards.

More than a dozen states will be able to enforce their own greenhouse gas emission standards on automobiles, rules that are key to fighting global warming.

From the LA Times:

“This is an essential piece of the nation’s environmental strategy,” said Tim Carmichael, president of the Coalition for Clean Air. Environmentalists estimate that cars create about a quarter of U.S. carbon emissions.

But it’s a nightmare scenario for automakers, which argue that complying with the California guidelines would create regulatory headaches and a technology burden that could add at least $1,000 and as much as $5,000 to the cost of each vehicle.

As such, the prospect of the waiver is creating a fierce debate about automotive regulation, pitting concerns about the environment against the deeply troubled finances of an industry that has thrown itself at the mercy of Washington just to remain solvent.

Unsurprisingly, automakers are calling foul, with GM corporate spokesperson Greg Martin complaining that asking GM to meet California emissions standards is like asking a cancer patient to “finish chemo and then go run the Boston Marathon.” Automakers have opposed California’s standards in court for years.

Honda is the only company that has accepted reality and begun preparing for new emissions standards, making plans for a fleet that’s even more efficient than is called for under the strict California rules.

Mary Nichols, chairwoman of California’s Air Resources Board, says the likelihood of getting a waver from new EPA chief Lisa Jackson to go ahead with implementing and forcing their emissions regulations is over 95%.

Automakers have had years and years to prepare for this, and most of them have dragged their feet, focusing on fighting the rules instead of figuring out how to comply with them. It’s about time they were forced to be accountable for the damage their vehicles are doing to the environment.

As Honda’s VP of government affairs said, “Any company that is not assuming a constant rate of improvement in fuel economy and carbon emissions is making a big mistake.”

Link [LA Times]
Photo credit: LeHighValleyLive.com

To Curb Pollution, China Paying Drivers to Give Up Their Cars

China’s efforts to curb air pollution by restricting driving within Beijing city limits was quite a success, so government officials sought to extend the benefits by continuing the traffic limits. Some citizens aren’t too happy with that idea, however, because of the inconvenience of finding alternative transportation. So the Chinese government has taken to offering up to $3,600 to give up heavily polluting vehicles, and even giving drivers more money to purchase cleaner cars.

From Treehugger:

The scheme by the environmental protection bureau is only one part of a massive plan to get Beijing’s more than 350,000 high-polluting vehicles out of the city during 2009. China’s capital has already banned cars from the roads on one of five weekdays based on their license plate number as part of a six-month trial that follows broader anti-traffic restrictions during the 2008 Olympic Games. The pay-off, say officials, is a 7 percent rise in blue sky days this year (although as we’ve mentioned, that statistic remains suspicious).

The initiative would take about 10 percent of the city’s 3.5-million registered cars off the roads — an amount that is estimated to account for 50 percent of the city’s notorious vehicle pollution.

Under the new rules, anyone caught driving vehicles that don’t meet Beijing’s lowest emissions standard within the city’s Fifth Ring Road or within a radius of 10-15km from the city center will be fined 100 yuan (about $12) after a three-month grace period.

The amount of compensation given to drivers giving up heavily polluted vehicles depends on the size, type and age of the vehicle – and payment will be prorated, so the sooner they give up the offending car, the more money they get.

It’s a commendable plan, especially since it will likely raise demand for cleaner cars, giving China’s auto industry a greater incentive to build them. It’s nice to see that after years of very little action – and ever-higher greenhouse gas emissions – China is doing something real to address the problem of air pollution in Beijing. Of course, there’s a long road ahead and China is still struggling to balance environmental concerns with economic progress. Let’s hope that this represents a big step forward.

Link [Treehugger]
Photo credit: Flickr user poeloq

Will Consumers Kill the Electric Car?

Are consumers the biggest threat to the rise of electric vehicles? That’s what Bill Vlasic of The New York Times is exploring, as we reach a crucial point in determining the future of American automobiles. Cost is the biggest hurdle – the Chevy Volt has a price tag of $40,000, too high for many people.

Ford has bet the farm on the Volt, and other automakers are turning toward the electric car concept as well. The American auto industry realizes that drastic changes are necessary to survive and they’re pouring billions into the technology in a gamble that consumers will bite.

From The New York Times:

These are risky bets. There are no guarantees that consumers — for all their stated concerns about global warming, dependence on foreign oil and unpredictable gas prices — will buy enough of them. They may balk, for example, at the limits on how far they can drive on a single charge.

So far, consumers have proved to be fickle about how much they care about fuel economy. When gas prices soared above $4 a gallon last year, sales of the market-leading Prius hybrid surged so quickly that Toyota could not build them fast enough. But demand sagged when gas prices dropped below $2 a gallon.

Industry analysts also note that electric models could be a harder sell than hybrids, which have a gasoline engine to assist and recharge battery packs, freeing them from the need to be plugged in.

Since many people seem apprehensive about the idea of running out of juice while traveling, the NYT suggests that car companies allow customers to change their batteries on the fly, setting up stations to allow quick battery changes or plug-in charging outlets.

The more people buy electric cars, the more demand there will be for batteries to be produced in mass quantities right here in the States, which would substantially reduce costs. Car companies will have to make a big manufacturing investment in order to improve the chances of success for their electric models.

It’s tough to say right now, with the state of the economy, whether there will be real demand for electric vehicles priced at almost double the cost of a hybrid. Gas prices will inevitably go back up, though, and people will once again become concerned about the daily costs of running a gas-powered vehicle, so there’s hope.

Link [The New York Times] via [Dot Earth]
Photo credit: Flickr user McPig

GM Giving Up 2 of 5 Private Jets Amid Criticism

C-SPAN isn’t exactly known for being the channel to watch when you want a good laugh. But, during the congressional hearings last week with the heads of GM, Chrysler and Ford, viewers were treated to some unexpected and bittersweet hilarity when the Big Three executives got skewered for arriving in Washington D.C. on a private jet. Their expressions during the barrage of questions belied the fact that they didn’t even consider how bad the luxury trips looked in light of the purpose of the hearings.

It’s bad enough that all three head honchos showed absolutely zero humility while begging Congress for a multi-billion dollar bailout. But then, Wagoner simply smirked when the three executives were asked if they planned to sell their private jets and fly back to Detroit via commercial airline. The response the public got from the auto companies afterward was simply that it’s “company policy” for the CEOs to travel on private jets, and that it was a “private matter”.

It was only after getting a verbal whipping from members of Congress that GM announced they’d be giving up their private jets.

From CNN Money:

GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson said the auto maker, which leases the planes, had decided to get rid of two of its five remaining jets before this week’s hearings as part of deep cost cutting under way at the company. The company sold two planes in September.

“We understand the symbolic issue of people showing up in Washington in corporate jets,” Wilkinson said. “We’re very sensitive to that.”

All travel at the company is getting cut dramatically as GM, which burned through $6.9 billion in cash in the third quarter, struggled to stay afloat. GM has eliminated half the workers who staff its Detroit-based hangar and planes, Wilkinson said.

“There’s a delicious irony in seeing private luxury jets flying into Washington, D.C., and people coming off them with tin cups in their hands,” Rep. Gary L. Ackerman (D.-N.Y.) said. “It’s almost like seeing a guy show up at the soup kitchen in high-hat and tuxedo.”

It’s pretty sickening to hear that the company considers it a “symbolic issue”. Continuing to revel in such unnecessary excess while asking for a handout isn’t going to garner much sympathy from the taxpaying public.

Link [CNN Money] + [YouTube]

Honda Debuts FC Sport Concept to Dazed Crowd

The reaction to the new Honda FC Sport Concept at the LA Auto Show last week seemed to indicate that the crowd was either so dazzled by the amazing design that they were speechless, or that everyone was kind of baffled by strange, clunky look of the thing. Treehugger described the front grille as resembling “a pair of black Honda Super Hero Underoos draped across the hood”, with the rear looking like “a tapered jet engine exhaust”. That doesn’t sound good.

From Treehugger:

There is no jet engine to speak of however, but instead a patented Honda hydrogen fuel cell. They have been trying to make the fuel cell fly for the past couple years. Honda is not a big believer in the plug-in hybrid, stating that today’s batteries are not quite up to snuff with their technology to make them a viable option. Some would say this is a smart move, others would say a foolish… but as fierce a competitor Honda is in the consumer marketplace, it is hard to question the method of their madness.

Is electric plug-ins the wave for the future, with Tesla, among many others leading the way. Or should we invest our hopes in a hydrogen infrastructure? While some folks claim that the trillion dollar infrastructure would not be economically viable, others say that hydrogen could be in our grasp for a lot less than we think.

I’m certainly no expert on hydrogen fuel cell vs. plug-in technology, so that part is better left for others to mull over. But, back to the design. It’s pretty fugly, is it not? Sure, there have been much uglier concept cars unveiled before, but it’s still pretty bad. The New York Times called it “Quantum of Grotesque” and said “each angle is worst than the last”. It’s certainly… different. But, you can’t blame them for trying something new. And, once the shock wore off, it certainly got people talking.

Link [Treehugger] + [The New York Times]
Photo credit: LA Auto Show

Tweaked-Out ‘Green’ Natural Gas-Powered Mustang GT

Green Autogas, a German natural gas conversion company, teamed up with Rollin on Chrome to produce this 300-horsepower, natural gas-burning Mustang GT in an attempt to prove that green doesn’t have to be boring. They tweaked the Mustang’s 4.6 liter V8 to run on natural gas, and also installed a body kit, carbon-fiber hood and 22-inch wheels.

From Autopia:

The CNG engine produces about 20 percent less CO2 than the gasoline engine it is based on and 95 percent less nitric nitrogen oxide (NOx) than a typical diesel, according to Motor Authority. It’s tough to put that in perspective, though, because no one’s provided fuel economy data or a cost-per-mile comparison with the stock ’stang.

Autogas isn’t the first outfit to build a green Mustang. The BioConcept Mustang built by German tuners FourMotor used a biofuel-burning 2.0-liter turbodiesel that produced 280 horsepower and 368 foot-pounds of torque. The car was good for 152.2 mph and raced in the 24 Hours of Nurburgring.

Pretty sweet, but definitely not as green as it could be – pure electric recharged with solar and/or wind would have been the straight green play.  But, it’s commendable nonetheless!

Link [Autopia]

Green Stimulus Idea – ‘Cash for Clunkers’

With the economy in need of some help, the people in need of some hope and a whole lot of pollutin’ vehicles on the road, one New York Times columnist has a ‘modest proposal’ that could go a long way toward all three: ‘Cash for Clunkers’. This idea would put into place a variety of programs in which the government buys up some of the oldest, most polluting vehicles and scraps them.

From The New York Times:

Here’s an example of how a Cash for Clunkers program might work. The government would post buying prices, perhaps set at a 20 percent premium over something like Kelley Blue Book prices, for cars and trucks above a certain age (say, 15 years) and below a certain maximum value (perhaps $5,000). A special premium might even be offered for the worst gas guzzlers and the worst polluters. An income ceiling for sellers might also be imposed — say, family income below $60,000 a year — to make sure the money goes to lower-income households.

People who sell their clunkers would receive government checks, perhaps paid to them at the motor vehicle bureau office where they turn in their old vehicles. They would be free to spend this money as they see fit, whether on a new car or truck or some other form of transportation — or anything else. To ensure that the program really pulls clunkers off the roads, only vehicles that had been registered and driven for, say, the past year would be eligible.

The government can either sell the cars it buys to licensed recyclers for scrap, or refit them with new emissions controls and resell them. But the government must not ship the cars to poor countries, where they would continue to belch pollutants.

Such a program would distribute some money to low-income people (since the rich rarely own clunkers), giving them a little extra cash to feed into the economy. The auto industry would benefit as well, since people would be trading up.

There are similar local plans already in place, but what really limits them is lack of money, which is where the need for stimulus comes in. The NYT article goes into details of how the program would work and how much it would cost. We love the idea of these sorts of government programs – achieving so many goals at once.

Link [The New York Times]
Photo credit: Flickr user Todd D Jones

How to Throw Away a Car

Wait, that’s not how you do it?

Link [Bits & Pieces]

VW’s Sleek ‘One-Liter Car’ Gets 235 Miles Per Gallon

This sexy looking vehicle might look like the future, but it’s going to be here sooner than you think. The best part is, it gets a stunning 235 miles per gallon. Yes, you read that right.

Volkswagen calls this baby the ‘One-Liter Car’, so named because that’s how much fuel it takes to get it 100 kilometers. It’s been on the back burner for six years now – the company’s been waiting for the material the body is made out of, carbon fiber, wasn’t expected to become affordable until 2012. Carbon fiber is a lightweight material that results in the entire car weighing only 660 pounds.

Well, lucky for car porn enthusiasts, VW has decided to start building a limited number of One-Liters in 2010 in their prototype shop, which will allow them to build about 1,000 a year to start.

From Wired’s Autopia:

VW unveiled the slick two-seater concept six years ago at a stockholder’s meeting in Hamburg. To prove it was a real car, Chairman Ferdinand Piech personally drove it from Wolfsburg to Hamburg. At the time, he said the car could see production when the cost of its carbon monocoque dropped from 35,000 Euros (about $55,000) to 5,000 Euros (about $8,000) — something he figured would happen in 2012. With carbon fiber being used in everything from airliners to laptops these days, VW’s apparently decided the cost is competitive enough to build at least a few hundred One-Liters.

VW’s engineers — who spent three years developing the car — made extensive use of magnesium, titanium and aluminum to bring it in at less than one-third the weight of a Toyota Echo. According to Canadian Driver, the front suspension assembly weighs just 18 pounds. The six-speed transmission features a magnesium case, titanium bolts and hollow gears; it weighs a tad more than 50 pounds. The 16-inch wheels are carbon fiber.

The magnesium steering wheel weighs a little more than a pound. How much of the concept car’s exotic hardware makes it to the production model remains to be seen.

Drool. The future of green cars is looking very nice. VW has really thought of every last detail with the One-Liter, which is incredibly aerodynamic and energy-efficient. Get all of the details at Wired’s Autopia blog.

Link [Wired]
Photo credit: Volkswagen

The Size of Your Car is Inversely Proportional to…

In the middle of a very cool comic was this gem.  You’re welcome.

Link [Virus Comix]

Next Page »